<b>Statistical characterization of variables used to test a planter under direct and conventional sowing systems</b> - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v31i4.951
Keywords:
agricultural mechanization, variability, number of samples
Abstract
The objective of this work was to statistically characterize variables such as wheels slip, theoretical and effective field capacity of a planter in direct (DS) and conventional sowing (CS) systems, based on the verification of the adjustment of a series of data to a statistical distribution, aiming for the best form of representation and values be adopted so that these variables be used in agricultural practices operations. The experiment in CS was done with a speed of 1.5 m s-1 with 190 repetitions, and the experiment in DS was done with 1.8 m s-1 and 58 repetitions. It was concluded that differing values were not detected, and the variables in study can be represented by the function density of normal probability (Gaussian distribution), and the variables can be used for its representations.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Published
2009-08-28
How to Cite
Vale, W. G. do, Garcia, R. F., Thiebaut, J. T. L., & Gravina, G. de A. (2009). <b>Statistical characterization of variables used to test a planter under direct and conventional sowing systems</b> - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v31i4.951. Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy, 31(4), 559-567. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v31i4.951
Issue
Section
Agricultural Engineering
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY AND COPYRIGHTS
I Declare that current article is original and has not been submitted for publication, in part or in whole, to any other national or international journal.
The copyrights belong exclusively to the authors. Published content is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) guidelines, which allows sharing (copy and distribution of the material in any medium or format) and adaptation (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially, under the terms of attribution.
2.0
2019CiteScore
60th percentile
Powered by 
2.0
2019CiteScore
60th percentile
Powered by 







































